Share this story

Secondhand shoppers, rejoice: Sonos is reversing course on a plan to brick all trade-in devices, so if someone wants to give or sell you a used speaker, it will still work. For now.

Sonos launched its "trade up" program last October. Consumers who owned a handful of older devices would receive a 30 percent discount on newer models if they traded in their old versions—a fairly typical program for expensive electronics, all things considered.

Further Reading

The company drew customers' ire with one important deviation from others' trade-in programs, though. Although the company does indeed sell refurbished equipment, devices users traded in through the program were destined not to become part of that cycle. Instead, Sonos straight up bricked them.

Completing the trade-in process required putting your device in "recycle mode," which not only wipes all of the user's personal data but also permanently deactivates the product. Once a Sonos product has been deactivated, the company says, "the product cannot be re-added to any system or used to set up a new Sonos system, even if the product has been reset to its factory settings," and the decision to deactivate it is irreversible. Instead of bringing in old products and refurbishing or reselling them, Sonos tells users to bring them to an e-waste center or send it back to Sonos for component recycling.

In recent days, however, Sonos quietly removed the recycle mode option from its app, replacing it with a prompt to call customer service. Additionally, the company now says it's working on posting a new trade-in flow to its website, which will remove recycle mode from the process.

There's still an enormous caveat about the oldest products, however. Sonos will be ending software updates for certain legacy product lines in May, including Zone Players, Connect, and Connect:Amp (launched in 2006; includes versions sold until 2015), first-generation Play:5 (launched 2009), CR200 (launched 2009), and Bridge (launched 2007).

Amid significant blowback, the company reiterated that existing devices in service will not stop working at that time, and it confirmed that it will provide bug fixes and security patches "for as long as possible" after the May deadline. Eventually, however, the products will stop connecting to newer phones, other devices, and as-yet nonexistent services and also likely be replaced.

I seemed to be one of the few people who understood where Sonos were coming from here. The key phrase was trade in - if you trade in your old item for a substantial discount on a new one, why should you still have it? Equally, why should you be able to sell it to someone who may not know it's about to become obsolete and thus damage Sonos' brand?

You may make an ecological point about these things being resource intensive and so morally wrong to inactivate - I don't really disagree, but if that's the way you want to go, buy a proper set of speakers that will last and plug them into something far smaller that can be upgraded with less impact as technology progresses - which, with the staggering growth in capabilities over the past decade is going to become less and less necessary.

I seemed to be one of the few people who understood where Sonos were coming from here. The key phrase was trade in - if you trade in your old item for a substantial discount on a new one, why should you still have it? Equally, why should you be able to sell it to someone who may not know it's about to become obsolete and thus damage Sonos' brand?

You may make an ecological point about these things being resource intensive and so morally wrong to inactivate - I don't really disagree, but if that's the way you want to go, buy a proper set of speakers that will last and plug them into something far smaller that can be upgraded with less impact as technology progresses - which, with the staggering growth in capabilities over the past decade is going to become less and less necessary.

If you "trade in" your old item, then Sonos physically has it. What purpose is there for bricking it?

I think the real lesson here is for people just to buy component speakers. Not everything needs to be connected to the internet. Spend some money on some quality speakers. Connect them to what you want. Enjoy them for a generation.

So are they giving these things a mode where they can just act as a satellite speaker to a new Sonos speaker? Like it doesn’t do anything “smart” on its own, but can just play what a controller speaker tells it too?

This Sonos debacle was rather timely in coming up a few days after Ars posted the story excerpt from "Unauthorized Toast" for our enjoyment. I can't help but feel Sonos deserves some of the blame that I am now the 81st person in queue for a hold on that book at my municipalities library. I don't have a good handle on what the general public perception is on IOT devices but perhaps some level of distrust is entering the public consciousness as more mainstream systems such as these begin to throw up red flags.

So are they giving these things a mode where they can just act as a satellite speaker to a new Sonos speaker? Like it doesn’t do anything “smart” on its own, but can just play what a controller speaker tells it too?

If you "trade in" your old item, then Sonos physically has it. What purpose is there for bricking it?

That’s incorrect. This “trade-in” method allows Sonos to not have to deal with any devices but still confirm that the “traded-in” devices are out of service.

I honestly don’t understand most of the backlash against it.

Kind of a poorly named service, either calling it any sort of 'trade' or 'recycling' program. They should call it "brick your old stuff, and buy new stuff for a discount". A better idea would be an actual 'trade in' service where they take physical custody of it, reuse whatever parts they can (the actual speaker, components, or just the shell) and use those parts in a new product, or sell the older model as a refurbished unit for less than the retail launch price. Bricking something is just nonsense, especially since now no one can use the dang thing even if it did work beforehand which leads just more waste.

If you "trade in" your old item, then Sonos physically has it. What purpose is there for bricking it?

That’s incorrect. This “trade-in” method allows Sonos to not have to deal with any devices but still confirm that the “traded-in” devices are out of service.

I honestly don’t understand most of the backlash against it.

Kind of a poorly named service, either calling it any sort of 'trade' or 'recycling' program. They should call it "brick your old stuff, and buy new stuff for a discount". A better idea would be an actual 'trade in' service where they take physical custody of it, reuse whatever parts they can (the actual speaker, components, or just the shell) and use those parts in a new product, or sell the older model as a refurbished unit for less than the retail launch price. Bricking something is just nonsense, especially since now no one can use the dang thing even if it did work beforehand which leads just more waste.

Yes, all that. However, realistically they won't be able to reuse old components in any profitable way.

I think the real lesson here is for people just to buy component speakers. Not everything needs to be connected to the internet. Spend some money on some quality speakers. Connect them to what you want. Enjoy them for a generation.

Yeah. I learned this the hard way.

I bought a $4,000 Google toilet, which analyzed fiber output, measured the density and quantity, performed an odor analysis, and checked for the presence of blood. It then compared the data to the data from my smart fridge and recommended dietary modifications that would result in a more perfect bowel movement.

Then, out of nowhere, Google ended support, and the toilet won't even flush (because the data from my bowel movements was sent to Google's servers in order to estimate the perfect amount of water needed for the most efficient flush). I'm not buying any more "smart" things for my home.

If you "trade in" your old item, then Sonos physically has it. What purpose is there for bricking it?

That’s incorrect. This “trade-in” method allows Sonos to not have to deal with any devices but still confirm that the “traded-in” devices are out of service.

I honestly don’t understand most of the backlash against it.

Kind of a poorly named service, either calling it any sort of 'trade' or 'recycling' program. They should call it "brick your old stuff, and buy new stuff for a discount". A better idea would be an actual 'trade in' service where they take physical custody of it, reuse whatever parts they can (the actual speaker, components, or just the shell) and use those parts in a new product, or sell the older model as a refurbished unit for less than the retail launch price. Bricking something is just nonsense, especially since now no one can use the dang thing even if it did work beforehand which leads just more waste.

I agree with a lot of what you said, but the current economic setup is to externalise costs where-ever possible - on to others or just straight on to the environment. So, if you're against this then really you need to seek out your greenest possible electable politician and vote them. Loudly. Until the game is changed, this will be how things are.

Is it possible to bypass (with some basic simple soldering )somethings on the circuitry, and just use the power supply, amplifier part, and speakers, and connect that to an inexpensive Bluetooth receiving device?Just asking for those who already have upgraded to brick mode. (Unless its somehow reversible).

If you "trade in" your old item, then Sonos physically has it. What purpose is there for bricking it?

That’s incorrect. This “trade-in” method allows Sonos to not have to deal with any devices but still confirm that the “traded-in” devices are out of service.

I honestly don’t understand most of the backlash against it.

Kind of a poorly named service, either calling it any sort of 'trade' or 'recycling' program. They should call it "brick your old stuff, and buy new stuff for a discount". A better idea would be an actual 'trade in' service where they take physical custody of it, reuse whatever parts they can (the actual speaker, components, or just the shell) and use those parts in a new product, or sell the older model as a refurbished unit for less than the retail launch price. Bricking something is just nonsense, especially since now no one can use the dang thing even if it did work beforehand which leads just more waste.

Yes, all that. However, realistically they won't be able to reuse old components in any profitable way.

Right, what are they going to do with it? The reason they ended support for the oldest products is the main board is obsolete, so they can't reuse any of that. The amplifiers might be salvageable but the power supplies are tightly tied to the amplifier architecture, and they're also designed with a specific physical envelope in mind. They can't be easily ported to another device, and they do contain wear items like electrolytic capacitors.

I traded my ZP100 up for a newer one and then I removed the transformer for my own use and dropped off the remainder at an e-waste collection point. I don't expect the average household to have a use for salvaged transformers.

I seemed to be one of the few people who understood where Sonos were coming from here. The key phrase was trade in - if you trade in your old item for a substantial discount on a new one, why should you still have it? Equally, why should you be able to sell it to someone who may not know it's about to become obsolete and thus damage Sonos' brand?

You may make an ecological point about these things being resource intensive and so morally wrong to inactivate - I don't really disagree, but if that's the way you want to go, buy a proper set of speakers that will last and plug them into something far smaller that can be upgraded with less impact as technology progresses - which, with the staggering growth in capabilities over the past decade is going to become less and less necessary.

If they wanted to do a trade-in program, they should have instead had the customer... you know... trade in the device, physically. Then Sonos could refurb it and re-sell it, instead of adding it to our ever-growing e-waste problem.

This was just a badly thought out program all around, and there's no reason whatsoever to defend it.

If you "trade in" your old item, then Sonos physically has it. What purpose is there for bricking it?

That’s incorrect. This “trade-in” method allows Sonos to not have to deal with any devices but still confirm that the “traded-in” devices are out of service.

I honestly don’t understand most of the backlash against it.

Kind of a poorly named service, either calling it any sort of 'trade' or 'recycling' program. They should call it "brick your old stuff, and buy new stuff for a discount". A better idea would be an actual 'trade in' service where they take physical custody of it, reuse whatever parts they can (the actual speaker, components, or just the shell) and use those parts in a new product, or sell the older model as a refurbished unit for less than the retail launch price. Bricking something is just nonsense, especially since now no one can use the dang thing even if it did work beforehand which leads just more waste.

Yes, all that. However, realistically they won't be able to reuse old components in any profitable way.

Really wish Ars had an upvote option for something along the lines of "I agree with what you said, but still don't like the circumstances".

I received the e-mail notification of this change, as all registered customers did. When my old devices stop functioning, I will find another company to deal with. My trust in Sonos has been permanently placed in recycle mode.

I think the real lesson here is for people just to buy component speakers. Not everything needs to be connected to the internet. Spend some money on some quality speakers. Connect them to what you want. Enjoy them for a generation.

Yeah. I learned this the hard way.

I bought a $4,000 Google toilet, which analyzed fiber output, measured the density and quantity, performed an odor analysis, and checked for the presence of blood. It then compared the data to the data from my smart fridge and recommended dietary modifications that would result in a more perfect bowel movement.

Then, out of nowhere, Google ended support, and the toilet won't even flush (because the data from my bowel movements was sent to Google's servers in order to estimate the perfect amount of water needed for the most efficient flush). I'm not buying any more "smart" things for my home.

I am not sure if this is satire, because I'm not going to research Google toilets. But amusing context aside, this is exactly what happens with smart devices.

Is it possible to bypass somethings on the circuitry, and just use the power supply, amplifier part, and speakers, and connect that to an external mini D amp?Just asking for those who already have upgraded to brick mode. (Unless its somehow reversible).

These don't have straight-through analog signal paths. At a minimum you need the system to boot so you can set the DSP to digitize the analog jacks. Anyone is welcome to hack on these things of course, if you open the case it's easy to flash your own software. But even most nerds aren't prepared to deal with a SuperH with very little memory and an obsolete radio.

I received the e-mail notification of this change, as all registered customers did. When my old devices stop functioning, I will find another company to deal with. My trust in Sonos has been permanently placed in recycle mode.

I don't own any Sonos devices, but may I ask what exactly you don't trust them to do?

They were only going to brick your device if you asked them to, for a discount on a new one. How have they betrayed you personally?

Yes, all that. However, realistically they won't be able to reuse old components in any profitable way.

Then Sonos should build component reuse into the design of thier product. Speaker drivers are a pretty slow moving technology.

I mean, if they are so slow moving, they should just keep supporting the old ones. If someone wants a new one, they can buy a new one and keep the old one or give it away.

Trying to reuse electronics components is a laudable goal, but it's not like any of the major manufacturers are doing it, because it's more costly to salvage, test, repair and reuse than just making new ones in China.

I think the real lesson here is for people just to buy component speakers. Not everything needs to be connected to the internet. Spend some money on some quality speakers. Connect them to what you want. Enjoy them for a generation.

Yeah. I learned this the hard way.

I bought a $4,000 Google toilet, which analyzed fiber output, measured the density and quantity, performed an odor analysis, and checked for the presence of blood. It then compared the data to the data from my smart fridge and recommended dietary modifications that would result in a more perfect bowel movement.

Then, out of nowhere, Google ended support, and the toilet won't even flush (because the data from my bowel movements was sent to Google's servers in order to estimate the perfect amount of water needed for the most efficient flush). I'm not buying any more "smart" things for my home.

I am not sure if this is satire, because I'm not going to research Google toilets. But amusing context aside, this is exactly what happens with smart devices.

I take this as a compliment, because my post is satire intended to humorously (absurdly?) make exactly the point you got from it.

I think the real lesson here is for people just to buy component speakers. Not everything needs to be connected to the internet. Spend some money on some quality speakers. Connect them to what you want. Enjoy them for a generation.

Yeah. I learned this the hard way.

I bought a $4,000 Google toilet, which analyzed fiber output, measured the density and quantity, performed an odor analysis, and checked for the presence of blood. It then compared the data to the data from my smart fridge and recommended dietary modifications that would result in a more perfect bowel movement.

Then, out of nowhere, Google ended support, and the toilet won't even flush (because the data from my bowel movements was sent to Google's servers in order to estimate the perfect amount of water needed for the most efficient flush). I'm not buying any more "smart" things for my home.

I am not sure if this is satire, because I'm not going to research Google toilets. But amusing context aside, this is exactly what happens with smart devices.

I think it may be a joke about Google TiSP, updated for the present decade.

I think the real lesson here is for people just to buy component speakers. Not everything needs to be connected to the internet. Spend some money on some quality speakers. Connect them to what you want. Enjoy them for a generation.

Yeah. I learned this the hard way.

I bought a $4,000 Google toilet, which analyzed fiber output, measured the density and quantity, performed an odor analysis, and checked for the presence of blood. It then compared the data to the data from my smart fridge and recommended dietary modifications that would result in a more perfect bowel movement.

Then, out of nowhere, Google ended support, and the toilet won't even flush (because the data from my bowel movements was sent to Google's servers in order to estimate the perfect amount of water needed for the most efficient flush). I'm not buying any more "smart" things for my home.

I am not sure if this is satire, because I'm not going to research Google toilets. But amusing context aside, this is exactly what happens with smart devices.

I think it may be a joke about Google TiSP, updated for the present decade.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this seems like an easy problem to solve from a product design standpoint.

Speakers themselves are relatively dead simple -- all you need is to pass the audio signal to the drivers, which can be accomplished by something as simple as a headphone jack.

So why not make the SOC "brain" of the Sonos modular and replaceable? New Wifi / Bluetooth standard come out in 10 years? Buy a new brain for your model, take out the old one, drop in the new one.

Why are we replacing 100% functioning drivers when the only thing that's "wrong" is the SOC doing the other work that is not interdependant? I guess that doesn't keep selling more and more units, though.

Yes, all that. However, realistically they won't be able to reuse old components in any profitable way.

Then Sonos should build component reuse into the design of thier product. Speaker drivers are a pretty slow moving technology.

It's not the speaker drivers that are the problem for Sonos here and it's somewhat obtuse to pretend they are.

Not really saying that drivers are the problem. I'm saying that there's no reason to replace your speakers every few years unless you are, significantly, upgrading their sonic capabilities or downsizing. I have some Polks and Paradigms that are... I don't even remember how old they are actually. Take care of the drivers and they will last forever.

Drivers, amplifier, housing... The only thing that isn't reusable is the control board (which might currently share space on the same PCB as the amp).

I wish Sonos would move to a model where they have interchangeable/replaceable/upgradeable control boards. I wouldn't mind 5 years of support if I could just buy new control boards for all of my speakers. As others have said, driver and amp technology aren't changing much.

I think the real lesson here is for people just to buy component speakers. Not everything needs to be connected to the internet. Spend some money on some quality speakers. Connect them to what you want. Enjoy them for a generation.

That’s exactly what you do with a ZonePlayer and an Amp. You connect speakers to them.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this seems like an easy problem to solve from a product design standpoint.

Speakers themselves are relatively dead simple -- all you need is to pass the audio signal to the drivers, which can be accomplished by something as simple as a headphone jack.

So why not make the SOC "brain" of the Sonos modular and replaceable? New Wifi / Bluetooth standard come out in 10 years? Buy a new brain for your model, take out the old one, drop in the new one.

Why are we replacing 100% functioning drivers when the only thing that's "wrong" is the SOC doing the other work that is not interdependant? I guess that doesn't keep selling more and more units, though.

What you suggest is possible but probably not too interesting to Sonos. For one thing, as you point out, people won't want to spend a lot to replace the circuit board of their old speaker. For another, they likely want to increase the perceived value of any new product, by making it look cooler, theoretically improving the sound (even if they don't improve it, they can say they did), and changing the size or shape, reducing power draw, changing the charging port, etc.

It severely undermines their value proposition if they admit "this new speaker is just like the old one, except it now supports bluetooth 4.0 or WI-FI 6." And it may not even be true, but if it were, would you expect them to admit that?

If you "trade in" your old item, then Sonos physically has it. What purpose is there for bricking it?

That’s incorrect. This “trade-in” method allows Sonos to not have to deal with any devices but still confirm that the “traded-in” devices are out of service.

I honestly don’t understand most of the backlash against it.

Sonos saves money not having to deal with having devices sent to them and them having to process those devices. It's good for them but not anyone else.

Letting the owner sell/give away an old working device probably almost guarantees that the new owner will someday be a purchaser of new Sonos devices. Bricking also may make some old owners look for alternate ways to stream music in their homes.